The Reverse Dunning Kruger Effect

[epronovost]

Mistakes born our of defensiveness, arrogance or carelessness are the most ordinary mistakes of them all. Moral of the story, stop trying to do satire, you suck at it.

I had a somewhat lengthy response about how satire on the internet really doesn't go over well.  

Thank you for your succinctiness.  

Satire is hard. You need to be smart, funny, know your public and know the stuff you are satirizing. It's even harder to make satire in writing form indeed because you lack almost all the clues of sarcasm. In my experience, people who genuinely attempt satire on internet are overwhelmingly idiots with a way too high opinion of themselves and their skills at humor, true representatives of the Dunning Kruger effect if you will.

[Vorpal]

I had a somewhat lengthy response about how satire on the internet really doesn't go over well.  

Thank you for your succinctiness.  

Satire is hard. You need to be smart, funny, know your public and know the stuff you are satirizing. It's even harder to make satire in writing form indeed because you lack almost all the clues of sarcasm. In my experience, people who genuinely attempt satire on internet are overwhelmingly idiots with a way too high opinion of themselves and their skills at humor, true representatives of the Dunning Kruger effect if you will.

Yeah  it's just the title that is meant to have ironic overtones.  A little zing back at people  who may overuse the DK effect.  The topic itself is not meant to be humorous. 

I try to lampoon things sometimes in real life.  Sometimes it's quite effective. Other times it falls flat. I rarely ever explain the satire and just go on with things.  I probably should be more concerned about the impact of that. But I am not.

[Vorpal]

Moral of the story, stop trying to do satire, you suck at it.

I  am better at satire than you are at diplomacy, civility, and fairness.

And since you felt free to try to psychoanalyze me in the other thread (poorly), I will take that as an invitation to give my two cents about you. Your thinly veiled reason for being a feminist is to get ladies to like you . Your intellectual integrity is compromised because of this, and also because of the pressures of groupthink. You will always interpret true statements made by someone identified as a resident of the outgroup as trivial, obvious, and mundane and statements you disagree with as stupid or outrageous. You are incapable of seeing anything in between. If you did acknowledge anything in between, you would not get the little crumbs of affection you crave. How did I do?

[Kim]

____________

[Dānu]

[no one]

I'm the reverse effect of decency.

[epronovost]

I'm the reverse effect of decency.

You mean cool?

[julep]

____________

Agree.

[Vera]

How did I do?

As grotesquely badly as you have done at everything else in this forum and, I'm willing to bet a lot, at everything in life.

You're a pathetic, hateful rape apologist and misogynist who has so little going on in his pathetic hateful life that you seek obscure corners of the internet to try and provoke a bunch of random strangers who, sadly for you, don't much care, other than laugh at what a sad little manlet you are and maybe shudder a bit in repulsion at your total lack of basic human decency and idiotic victim-blaming - "if two people drink and fuck are they both rapists" - wow, you got us there, you legal genius. What a sad, little joke. I'd pity you but you don't deserve it.

[Vorpal]

How did I do?

As grotesquely badly as you have done at everything else in this forum and, I'm willing to bet a lot, at everything in life.

You're a pathetic, hateful rape apologist and misogynist who has so little going on in his pathetic hateful life that you seek obscure corners of the internet to try and provoke a bunch of random strangers who, sadly for you, don't much care, other than laugh at what a sad little manlet you are and maybe shudder a bit in repulsion at your total lack of basic human decency and idiotic victim-blaming - "if two people drink and fuck are they both rapists" - wow, you got us there, you legal genius. What a sad, little joke. I'd pity you but you don't deserve it.

I actually feel sorry for you though. I think you are a talented woman. BPD is a challenging condition that can overwhelm IQ.  Sometimes it makes things difficult when they don't have to be.

[Vorpal]

The George Floyd situation was the surest example of reverse Dunning-Krueger effect.   The officer kept pressing on the neck despite protests from fellow officers and bystanders.  He  was the superior officer. He we would not be deterred.  He persisted even longer than he might have without objections.  Smugness and oppositionality are the mainstays of the phenomenon.

[GenesisNemesis]

Shit stirrer gonna shit stir.

[Vera]

Shit stirrer gonna shit stir.

Come on, man, don't you be kink shamin' now

[Szuchow]

Come on, man, don't you be kink shamin' now 

Some kinks should be shamed. Like dudes below who called themselves slaves of Mary:

[GenesisNemesis]

Come on, man, don't you be kink shamin' now 

Some kinks should be shamed. Like dudes below who called themselves slaves of Mary:

I must wash my eyes after seeing such filth.

[Szuchow]

Some kinks should be shamed. Like dudes below who called themselves slaves of Mary:

I must wash my eyes after seeing such filth.

I mean femdom ain't anything bad but these dudes took it several steps too far.

[Vera]

Some kinks should be shamed. Like dudes below who called themselves slaves of Mary:

Blessed and Deranged Slaves of Mary?

[Szuchow]

Some kinks should be shamed. Like dudes below who called themselves slaves of Mary:

Blessed and Deranged Slaves of Mary?

Yes, something like that. 

[Vorpal]

One thing for sure: Szuchow is into MILFs.

[Vorpal]

This southern blizzard thing and the authorities stance might be an example of reverse dunning-krueger effect. General advise is given to stay off the roads and it is good advise for a lot of people. There are a few accidents actually happening. We know best, we are the authorities.

Should I follow that advise, and am I foolish to think otherwise? As someone with 25 year experience with New England winters, I know a thing or two about a thing or two. "But, up north they have plows and sand and salt." Yes , but these things were not instantly and magically applied. I grew up in a town with many rolling hills. Each street was treated depending on priority. Many flat streets were not treated with sand or salt at all. I currently live in a town with no hills. I can see the road conditions and the amount of ice.I know the limitations of my current tires. I know how to safely drive here and now. Should I not do so, because others cannot condition themselves to drive more slowly and allow longer distances to stop? Is my behavior going to signal people that it is fine for them to drive when it is not? I am taking into account that other drivers might not be as mindful, so I give an even wider birth.

I think it is a fine admonition, but what I do not like people acting as if what I am doing is uninformed.

In my town, they are calling this day a blizzard. Similar conditions up north we call a Tuesday.

[Paleophyte]

This southern blizzard thing and the authorities stance might be an example of reverse dunning-krueger effect.  General advise is given to stay off the roads and it is good advise for a lot of people. There are a few accidents actually happening. We know best, we are the authorities.

Should I follow that advise, and am I foolish to think otherwise?  As someone with 25 year experience with New England winters, I know a thing or two about a thing or two.  "But, up north they have plows and sand and salt." Yes , but these things were not instantly and magically applied.  I grew up in a town with many rolling hills. Each street was treated depending on priority.  Many flat streets were not treated with sand or salt at all.  I currently live in a town with no hills.   I can see the road conditions and the amount of ice.I know the limitations of my current tires.  I know how to safely drive here and now. Should I not do so, because others cannot condition themselves to drive more slowly and allow longer distances to stop?    Is my behavior going to signal people that it is fine for them to drive when it is not?   I am taking into account that other drivers might not be as mindful, so I give an even wider birth.

I think it is a fine admonition, but what I do not like people acting as if what I am doing is uninformed.

In my town, they are calling this day a blizzard.  Similar conditions up north we call a Tuesday.

Are you really wondering if we'll warn you not to go play in traffic after this lovely necropost? Please do, I'm sure that you know best. You and all the other DK sufferers can go have a little meet-up.

[Vorpal]

I have been driving. My Mexican restaurant is open, as well as a few gas stations. Driving conditions were safer than usual with 90% less traffic.

Why, bother to respond to my post, if you are going to ignore the point, regurgitate useless forum speak, and wish me ILL fortune? Politely, pass on by.

Updating older threads is not a rule violation here like it is at the more brainless sites. It is actually encouraged as it should be. Mindless mores of forum subculture that encourage regurgitation of in-group babble amount to circle jerk and nothing more. A sorry state of affairs among people who purportedly value reason and insight.

[brewerb]

This southern blizzard thing and the authorities stance might be an example of reverse dunning-krueger effect.  General advise is given to stay off the roads and it is good advise for a lot of people. There are a few accidents actually happening. We know best, we are the authorities.

Should I follow that advise, and am I foolish to think otherwise?  As someone with 25 year experience with New England winters, I know a thing or two about a thing or two.  "But, up north they have plows and sand and salt." Yes , but these things were not instantly and magically applied.  I grew up in a town with many rolling hills. Each street was treated depending on priority.  Many flat streets were not treated with sand or salt at all.  I currently live in a town with no hills.   I can see the road conditions and the amount of ice.I know the limitations of my current tires.  I know how to safely drive here and now. Should I not do so, because others cannot condition themselves to drive more slowly and allow longer distances to stop?    Is my behavior going to signal people that it is fine for them to drive when it is not?   I am taking into account that other drivers might not be as mindful, so I give an even wider birth.

I think it is a fine admonition, but what I do not like people acting as if what I am doing is uninformed.

In my town, they are calling this day a blizzard.  Similar conditions up north we call a Tuesday.

Advise, not order/mandate. Take a chill pill.

[Paleophyte]

I have been driving. My Mexican restaurant is open, as well as a few gas stations. Driving conditions were safer than usual with 90% less traffic.

"It didn't kill me this time" and other cognitive biases that cost us two space shuttles, more than a few criticality incidents, and countless smaller accidents, deaths and injuries. Congratulations on not becoming a statistic this time.

Why, bother to respond to my post

Because you're being rude and apparently need to be told as much.

if you are going to ignore the point

Who said I ignored it? If you are in fact at the low end of the Dunning-Kruger spectrum then you aren't going to be capable of recognizing it. Your "I know better" attitude would be precisely what we'd expect as a classic symptom.

But since you seem to need basic road safety spelled out for you here's my thinking on the matter:

• People who are paid to know better and have a very specialized set of skills that they've spent a lot of time and effort refining recommended that you not drive. Perhaps they're wrong but the odds are very good that they aren't. Yours is the same line of thinking that gets us "I know how to handle a car while drunk. I didn't have that many." wrapped around a tree.
  
• The greatest risk to competent drivers during poor road conditions isn't traction or visibility. It's being struck by incompetent drivers who thought that they knew better but clearly didn't. The result of this is that, as road conditions deteriorate, fewer and fewer competent drivers take to the road because they know the risks of being T-boned by an imbecile who has lost control. This leads to a higher proportion of nitwits driving under poor conditions, which further discourages anybody with sense in a feedback loop that pretty quickly gets all of the smart people off the roads. You're then left with two types of people on the roads: those who have no better option and idiots who don't know better. Your driving forecast for today was, "partially snow-covered with a chance of drifting moron." Thank you for self-identifying and helping them get their forecast right.
  
• Driving is notorious for suffering from the D-K effect, to the point where it has become a textbook example. The overwhelming majority of people think that they're better than average drivers, which is a violation of basic statistics. With 90% of the traffic off of the road the remaining 10% will be made up of people traveling by necessity, dangerous idiots, people who are genuinely good drivers. That's a much higher proportion of dangerous idiots driving in worse-than-usual conditions. You risked driving amongst them for some take-out, so which group do you think that puts you into?
  
• The opposite of the D-K syndrome isn't what you describe. It's called Impostor Syndrome and manifests as experts who undervalue their knowledge. This results from decades of doing difficult tasks until you've forgotten how hard it was to learn them and how few people can. If you want to find a great driver look for the guy who thinks that he isn't much better than average because he's in the bottom half of Formula One.
  

But I'm glad that your Tex-Mex and your over-inflated sense of entitlement was worth it.

Updating older threads is not a rule violation here like it is at the more brainless sites.  It is actually encouraged as it should be.

What colour is the sky in your world? Last I checked necroposting wasn't encouraged here. Nobody said anything about rule violations but it's bad netiquette. If you have something new to say then start a new post. Or better yet, go get your grub like you're going to and don't make a production out of it. If you're going to be an entitled nitwit either way and the least you can do is be quiet about it.

[Vorpal]

I have been driving. My Mexican restaurant is open, as well as a few gas stations. Driving conditions were safer than usual with 90% less traffic.

"It didn't kill me this time" and other cognitive biases that cost us two space shuttles, more than a few criticality incidents, and countless smaller accidents, deaths and injuries. Congratulations on not becoming a statistic this time.

Why, bother to respond to my post

Because you're being rude and apparently need to be told as much.

if you are going to ignore the point

Who said I ignored it? If you are in fact at the low end of the Dunning-Kruger spectrum then you aren't going to be capable of recognizing it. Your "I know better" attitude would be precisely what we'd expect as a classic symptom.

But since you seem to need basic road safety spelled out for you here's my thinking on the matter:

• People who are paid to know better and have a very specialized set of skills that they've spent a lot of time and effort refining recommended that you not drive. Perhaps they're wrong but the odds are very good that they aren't. Yours is the same line of thinking that gets us "I know how to handle a car while drunk. I didn't have that many." wrapped around a tree.
  
• The greatest risk to competent drivers during poor road conditions isn't traction or visibility. It's being struck by incompetent drivers who thought that they knew better but clearly didn't. The result of this is that, as road conditions deteriorate, fewer and fewer competent drivers take to the road because they know the risks of being T-boned by an imbecile who has lost control. This leads to a higher proportion of nitwits driving under poor conditions, which further discourages anybody with sense in a feedback loop that pretty quickly gets all of the smart people off the roads. You're then left with two types of people on the roads: those who have no better option and idiots who don't know better. Your driving forecast for today was, "partially snow-covered with a chance of drifting moron." Thank you for self-identifying and helping them get their forecast right.
  
• Driving is notorious for suffering from the D-K effect, to the point where it has become a textbook example. The overwhelming majority of people think that they're better than average drivers, which is a violation of basic statistics. With 90% of the traffic off of the road the remaining 10% will be made up of people traveling by necessity, dangerous idiots, people who are genuinely good drivers. That's a much higher proportion of dangerous idiots driving in worse-than-usual conditions. You risked driving amongst them for some take-out, so which group do you think that puts you into?
  
• The opposite of the D-K syndrome isn't what you describe. It's called Impostor Syndrome and manifests as experts who undervalue their knowledge. This results from decades of doing difficult tasks until you've forgotten how hard it was to learn them and how few people can. If you want to find a great driver look for the guy who thinks that he isn't much better than average because he's in the bottom half of Formula One.
  

But I'm glad that your Tex-Mex and your over-inflated sense of entitlement was worth it.

Updating older threads is not a rule violation here like it is at the more brainless sites.  It is actually encouraged as it should be.

What colour is the sky in your world? Last I checked necroposting wasn't encouraged here. Nobody said anything about rule violations but it's bad netiquette. If you have something new to say then start a new post. Or better yet, go get your grub like you're going to and don't make a production out of it. If you're going to be an entitled nitwit either way and the least you can do is be quiet about it.

Okay. This is a good response, not that agree with most of it.  Was I supposed to know all that from your drive-by post?  You really did think I was psychic.

I described my driving experiences in a detailed way.  I am not a particularly good driver but given the specific conditions here, the distance I was travelling and my method, it was an objectively smart decision to drive. I had a nice sit down meal at the Mexican for lunch and just got back from getting some take out pizza as you posted this.

My whole reason for writing this post was because yesterday I asked neighbors (online) to mention businesses that were open.  I was dog piled on about the need to stay off the road.  At that time I planned on walking and was criticized for risking wind chill damage. I know how to deal with winter better than these people for good reason.  Specific details can create an exception to a general trend that is born of actual data not just bias.  

I am coining the term Reverse Dunning Krueger here , so I can flip it on which ever axis I choose. When professionals cling to good general wisdom despite clear evidence that there is an exception, they fall victim to the RDK.